HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD LUCKNOW WRIT - C No. - 11291 of 2025 Court No. - 3 HON'BLE SHEKHAR B. SARAF, J. HON'BLE BRIJ RAJ SINGH, J. 1. Heard learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner and learned Standing Counsel appearing for the State. 2. This is a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India wherein the writ petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned order dated August 25, 2024 passed by respondent no.2 whereby her claim under the Mikhyamantri Krishak Durghatna Kalyan Yojna has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has highlighted the Panchayatnama report which was prepared by the police in front of five witnesses that categorically stated that the cause of death was electrocution. He has further submitted that the postmortem report does not indicate any reason whatsoever for the cause of death and simply states that cause of death could not be ascertained. 4. Upon perusal of the impugned order, it appears that the authority concerned has only relied on the postmortem report and has not taken into account the Panchayatnama report that clearly indicates that the death was due to electrocution. In the Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Prabhakar Nath Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : C.S.C. Smt. Lalita .....Petitioner(s) State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Revenue Lko. And 3 Others .....Respondent(s) light of the same, a direction is issued to the authority concerned to take into consideration the aforesaid facts and thereafter pass a reasoned order in accordance with law. The entire exercise should be completed within twelve weeks from date. 5. With the above direction, the writ petition is disposed of. November 26, 2025 Sachin WRIC No. 11291 of 2025 2 (Brij Raj Singh,J.) (Shekhar B. Saraf,J.) Digitally signed by :- SACHIN MEHROTRA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench